Quotable: Heidi Grant Halvorson
Mastering new skills is not optional in today’s business environment.
“In a fast-moving, competitive world, being able to learn new skills is one of the keys to success. It’s not enough to be smart – you need to always be getting smarter.”
Heidi Grant Halvorson, author: Nine Things Successful People Do Differently
Enabling Your Workers to be Trainers
In 2007 Iron Mountain (records management company) was suffering from over-expansion (it had acquired 250 companies in 10+ years) and needed a way to get everyone performing in a similar manner. Training started with the drivers and couriers since they were closest to the customer and, after designing a curriculum, the training was implemented via a peer-trainer-coach approach.
Frontline employees have to apply and pass an interview for the training-coach positions. These positions are in addition to their "regular" jobs (although they do get additional pay). Once chosen, coaches spend a week in training in Atlanta GA learning everything from lift-gate operation to how to speak with customers.
By the end of 2013. Iron Mountain had 400 certified coaches; coaches must recertify each year. Some of the organizational benefits realized since the inception of the peer-trainer-coach approach:
Turnover has fallen 15%
Worker-compensation claims dropped 4.5 million in the first year
Document scanning errors have dropped 85% from their peak
35 coaches have been promoted in their "regular" roles
TD Commentary: There are so many win-win outcomes from this case study. First, using peers as trainers benefits the credibility of the trainer and the training curriculum. Second, using workers who have volunteered to become trainers means you have passionate trainers. And third, this approach is hugely cost effective - in addition to the fact that the trainer-coaches receive a "bonus" for training (not a salary), there is no way any organization would have a "workforce" of 400 trainers.
Kudos to Stacy Henry, Director of Learning, and her team for coming up with this ingenious approach to getting training to the front line in an economical and expedient way.
Source: Workforce.com November 2013
Quotable: Ara Ohanian
2013 will see the emergence of L&D professionals who are truly focused on the effect they produce on business. I see the L&D professional progressing through three states of evolution. Yesterday’s professionals were concerned with pushing out information through courses. Today’s hybrid uses a blend of push techniques and technological pull techniques to share information and stimulate conversations.
Tomorrow’s L&D professionals will step back from full focus on content creation and delivery, seeing it as a single strand of responsibility. They will see their role expand to include building systems where employees learn from each other, and, crafting filtering systems for the best information for a particular need to be located as quickly as possible.
This new role will involve a combination of creative thinking, collaboration with the business, and focus on speed and delivery against business objectives.
Quotable: Ara Ohanian, Chief Happiness Officer and CEO, CERTPOINT Systems
June Training Doctor News Is Released!
Have you seen our June newsletter yet? Check it out - www.trainingdr.com/newsletter
You know that training program isn't going to work, right?
The greatest service L+D can provide to leaders is to let them know that a "learning program" by itself will likely not help them achieve the outcomes they seek.
Mike Hamilton; retiring CLO of Ernst & Young
Training Magazine's Top 125 Training Organizations (Many TD Clients on this list!)
Training Magazine recently announced its Top 125 workplace training organizations. If you'd like to see the list, visit: http://pubs.royle.com/publication/?i=146825
Do you think in a particular "style?"
Training Magazine and Pearson TalentLens recently conducted a "thinking styles" survey of 1200+ trainers and discovered that we have three quite dominant thinking styles (out of 7 possible styles):
Inquisitive
Open Minded
Systematic
You, too, can find out how you think - and how that thinking style applies to our field - by visiting www.ThinkWatson.com
Beware the "Great Crew Change"
Heard 'round the water cooler: The great crew change': Baby Boomers retiring and a lack of people coming into the industry
Interview with Learning Expert: Will Thalheimer
Measuring Learning Results
T/D: You've written a research in practice report called Measuring Learning Results which is an understanding of learning and focusing on measurement. Can you tell us more about that?
Thalheimer: Over the years I've been immersed in learning and looking at the research on learning. One of the things I noticed in our field is that there are some leverage points - things that affect the whole field, things that drive us to do what we do. One of those is measurement. How we measure affects how we practice instructional design. So I'll share with you a couple of things that I found. One thing is that smile sheets aren't good enough.
T/D: Right, don't we know that at a gut level?
Thalheimer: We may know it at a gut level, but we keep doing it. I did some research with the e-learning Guild and we looked at how it's the most popular method, after completion rate, for an e-learning program. So they've done like a research meta-analysis on this, and they found that smile sheet ratings don't even correlate with learning results.
T/D: Interesting.
Thalheimer: They correlated like 0.09 - which is…
T/D: Negligible.
Thalheimer: Negligible. Smile sheets don't correlate with on the job performance either.
T/D: What does your opinion have to do with your performance? Nothing.
Thalheimer: Right, so that's intriguing. So one of the things we're trying to do when we measure stuff is to get better. There are really three reasons that you might want to measure learning - one is to support learning, to give the learners feedback. The other thing is to improve the learning interventions we create. So improve our learning designs. The third thing is to prove our results to our organization; our certification, grading, that kind of thing. So three main reasons there. If we're going to improve our learning designs one of the things that we need to do is make sure that our learning metrics are predictive of people's actual performance. If our smile sheets aren’t predictive, then they're no good at doing that, they're no good at giving us good information.
I've been playing with trying to improve my own smile sheet so I'm going to recommend a couple of things. One - let's not ask people just overall questions. Let's put in some real learning points that we wanted to get across, because people aren't very good at remembering everything after a session, right? So if you ask them in general did you like it you're going to get general responses. Instead; this is one of the learning points that we talked about, how valuable was that to you?
Then I ask them - what's the likelihood that you're going to use this within the next two weeks? I have from a zero to 100% in 10% increments.
T/D: That's brilliant.
Thalheimer: I also ask them - what's the probability in the next two weeks that you'll share this with one of your co-workers? I also really focus on the open ended comments. I find that those are really some of the most valuable feedback that you can get to improve your course. I've gotten a lot of bad feedback too, but I've gotten some really good feedback on smile sheets that has told me - you really need to improve that exercise. Or, have more stuff going on in the afternoon that's fun because people were tired - stuff like that. Okay, you hear that over and over - you better change it.
Thalheimer: Another thing I do with smile sheets is I also like to follow up two weeks later. I follow up and I do a couple of interesting things. One is I ask the same question on the same six point scale about how valuable you thought the training was. Now they've gone back to the work place. They now really know how valuable it is. So it gives a better anchoring.
I’ve learned a couple of other things from looking at measurement from a learning fundamental standpoint. One thing is, if we measure learning right at the end of learning, what is it we are measuring? We're measuring the learning intervention’s ability to create understanding. Which is fine, that's good, but we're not measuring the learning intervention’s ability to minimize forgetting. You have a full day session or you have an e-learning program and you measure people right away - everything is top of mind.
T/D: You should be able to recall it.
Thalheimer: You can easily recall it and not only that, but you feel confident that you can recall it. So that's a really biased way to get information. That's one of the reasons that make it a bad proxy for your ability to remember it on the job.The final mistake we make is to measure something in the same context that people learned it. That context is going to remind them of what they learned and because of that they're going to get better results than if we measured them in a different context. So we need to do one of two things - we either need to know that our results are biased because we're in the same context that they learned in. Or we need to change the context and make it more like the real world context so that it's more realistic. It's more predictive of that real world environment.
T/D: Great points! Thank you Will.
Will Thalheimer founded Work-Learning Research which is a consulting practice that helps clients build more effective learning interventions. He’s been in the learning and performance field since 1985. His professional focus is on bridging the gap between the research side and the practice side
Online Collaboration MUST be Designed
One of the most wonderful things about the online classroom is the ability to bring learners together who may otherwise be geographically separated. If one individual in New York and one individual in Arizona need the same training, the virtual classroom not only allows them to partake in that training without travel, but also to take that training with fellow learners.
Too often, however, the virtual classroom is used in presentation-mode rather than in collaborative-mode.
All virtual classroom platforms pledge that their product enables your organization and your learners to work collaboratively. And it is true. All virtual classroom platforms allow for learners to interact verbally, via chat or instant messenger, through the use of feedback symbols or emoticons, and often through breakout rooms which enable smaller discussions and group activities to occur.
This doesn't just happen spontaneously, however. It is imperative that the training be designed to be collaborative.
One of the basic tenets of adult learning is that adults prefer to learn collaboratively; in other words adults prefer to learn with others. Therefore, it is imperative that the focus of the learning process is on the learners working together, discussing, questioning, problem solving, and in general, contributing to the learning process and the learning content.
As Instructional Designers, we must put quite a bit of thought into how we can ensure the learners work together to achieve the learning outcome, rather than sitting at their individual sites being passive recipients of a presentation.
The "Problem" With Virtual Learning
We recently read this blog post which really made our blood to boil!
In a nutshell, the writer, a college professor, finds himself stranded at the airport and decides his situation should not impede his regularly scheduled class. He can simply use the virtual technology his college supplies, to fulfill his teaching obligations.
After experiencing an unsuccessful "class," he wrote a lengthy diatribe about how virtual technology will never replace face-to-face teaching. Here are some things he failed to consider (and, quite frankly, most people who are new to virtual technology or use it occasionally, also fail to consider):
1. Choose the right technology for the job and be sure you know how to use it. We recently received a directive from a client telling us to not use the highlighter tool to highlight text on the slide because "it doesn't work, it scribbles all over the slide." In fact, the "breakdown" was with the Bamboo tablet in our office.
2. You cannot decide, on the spur of the moment, that you will teach using virtual technology. A delivery of this type must be planned for (see next article). The writer bemoans: Tonight was going to involve role playing, discussions, presentations, and even interactive trivia.
3. If you have a limiting belief that you can only "lecture" while using virtual teaching platforms, and that cannot be as successful as you would have been in the classroom - you will be correct. His sentiments exactly: Tonight I am subjecting my students to this hollowed-out lesson. I do so out of necessity. I know it is not the best experience for my students, or for myself..
The server and the virtual platform have little to do with one another other than being the "power cord;" would you say that your electric company was horrible if your lamp shorted out? We'd be frustrated too: I am now on my third attempt at uploading the lecture. During the two previous attempts a prompt came up, saying "server failure." The program crashed and nothing was recorded or could be recovered. An hour lecture up in smoke - three times over, but it has nothing to do with the virtual classroom.
Virtual classrooms ARE the training room of the future. We recognize that not everyone will be comfortable there, and that's ok (not everyone is comfortable standing in front of a room speaking, either); but don't blame the technology for a lack of forethought, planning, or skill on the part of the human.
Powerpoint Slides are not Participant Guides
The content and design of a participant guide is critical to its effective use by the learner. Too often, reproductions of PowerPoint slides are considered participant guides. There is absolutely no point in providing participants a reproduction of what they are already looking at. A slide is simply a visual representation of a concept or a reminder of content - it is more for the faciltiator than the participant.
Perhaps the idea of slide-as-participant-guide is the reason participant materials are so often ineffective and therefore often are not provided at all.
Participant guides should include, at a minimum:
The purpose and objectives of the course. Why am I here? What is the point of this training?
The must-have, need-to-know concepts, so you can ensure the learners left the training with the essentials (facts, rules, procedures)
Instructions for any activities they will participate in during class (Note: instructions should include both technical ( you will have 30 minutes to work with a group of 4) as well as instructional (your task is to identify three ways we use XYZ in our business and how that differentiates us from our competitors)
Instructions for any exercises you may want them to complete post-training or instructions for how to begin to implement their new knowledge and skills back on the job (e.g. In the next 2 weeks you should X, Y and Z and report your results to your team lead)
Any resources they may need on the job like links to web pages (internal or external), reports, books, contact information, etc.
The participant guide should be just that, a GUIDE for the learning process; not a picture book of what you are presenting in class.
Interview with Learning Expert: Dr. Spencer Kagan
Total Engagement Made Easy Through Simple Proven Brain-Based Strategies
T/D: You say that participants enjoy our presentations more, and we find presenting easier and more joyful when we align how we present with how brains best learn. Are there a couple of simple, interactive instructional structures you can share with us?
Kagan: A traditional presenter might give some information and call on one person to say: What do you think? Or, how would you answer that? All the other brains in the room are semi to fully comatose.
Another presenter might say: talk it over with a partner. Of course the high achiever in each pair says well goal one was…goal two was…goal three was… . The other person goes, “Ah Hah”, while their mind is really somewhere else.
A better technique would be a Rally Robin: you name one, I name one - so we're both accountable. It gets all brains engaged. Rally Robin is one of the 200 structures that we train. We have structures that engage left hemisphere/right hemisphere, very specific parts of different hemispheres and so on. We've been doing this since 1968 and in the process we've developed lots of instructional strategies that create full engagement.
T/D: What's the difference between a structure and an activity?
Kagan: Rally Robin is a structure. So if I have you Rally Robin, the safety procedures that we've just gone through - you name the first one, I name the next. That's an activity - it's structure plus the content.
A different day I have you Rally Robin for team building or fun - name fun things to do after work. That's a different activity. So we work with a basic formula - structure plus content equals an activity. That's why the structures are so powerful. Any one structure can produce an infinite number of activities.
T/D: Activities keep people engaged, but you say achievement goes up as well?
Kagan: We have lots of research showing that academic achievement goes up among students; it doesn't matter whether it's college or kindergarten. In addition, self-esteem, empathy, social skills, liking the class and content, liking for instructor - we've got hard data on all of those things plus many more. The key is getting everyone involved and everyone cooperating in the e-Learning process.
There have been over a thousand research studies on cooperative learning and overall it's been the most investigated set of instructional strategies ever. The results, according to analysis, are extraordinarily powerful. For example, students who were about 50 in traditional classrooms are scoring about 78 in a cooperative learning classroom even though the classroom time is identical.
Frank Lyman, a good friend of mine, who invented Think-Pair-Share once summarized it very well. He said, "A river takes banks to flow." When you don't have structure there's chaos.
T/D: That's a great analogy. Where can people learn more about your structures?
Kagan: Our webpage is one place to go and it's www.kaganonline.com .
T/D: You have books and tools and what other resources available?
Kagan: We have 100 publications of how to use instructional structures in all kinds of settings including how to become The Dynamic Trainer which is the most relevant for business trainers.
T/D: With a hundred resources to choose from, what's the one you think our readers should look for?
Kagan: The Dynamic Trainer.
T/D: Alright, thanks so much Dr Kagan, it's been a pleasure.
Dr. Spencer Kagan is an internationally acclaimed researcher, presenter and author of over a hundred books, chapters and scientific journal articles. He's a former clinical psychologist and full professor of psychology and education at the University of California. Dr Kagan is the principal author of the single most comprehensive book for educators in each of four fields - Cooperative Learning, Multiple Intelligences, Classroom Discipline and Classroom Energizers. We’re discussing total engagement made easy through simple proven brain-based strategies.
5 General Rules for Workplace Tests Part-5
Rule #5
Ordering Questions
You may wish to group evaluation questions by topic or you may mix them up. Back on the job, the work people encounter won't show up in any kind of logical sequence – so mixing questions up has its merits.
On the other hand, keeping questions grouped allows you to easily spot if a learner just "didn't get" a particular topic. If all the questions on a similar topic are grouped together and the learner answers all or almost all of them wrong, either he needs retraining or the topic itself was poorly presented. If your same-topic-area questions are interspersed throughout the exam, it might be harder for you to spot a problem.
5 General Rules for Workplace Tests Part-4
Rule #4
Use Key Words
Key words assist the test-taker in figuring out the answer.
Who triggers the respondent to look for a person or position
What triggers the test taker to look for a thing or a process
Where triggers them to look for a place or location
When triggers them to look for a date or a period of time
Why will signal them to look for reasoning.